Abstract
The links between educational development and economic capability are widely recognised and have provided part of the rationale for the shift to market concepts of education in many countries. As more functions have been devolved to school level, it has become increasingly evident that principals require training and development to carry out their new responsibilities and to lead improvement in their schools. In Singapore, aspiring principals take a 1‐year training course which includes mentoring by an established principal. In England and Wales, the new National Professional Qualification for Headship is undertaken on a part‐time basis and adopts a quasi competence model without a mentoring dimension. This article compares the two approaches and concludes that training is likely to be more effective if mentoring is a central component of the process.